To:HIS MOTHER AND HIS BROTHER

Published:First published in 1929 in the journalProletarskaya RevolyutsiyaNo. 8-9.

      Sent from Shushenskoye to Podolsk.

      Printed from 
 the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1977,

      Moscow,Volume 37,

      pages266-268.Translated:The Late George H. HannaTranscription\Markup:D. MorosPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive.You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work, as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

June 20, 1899

Ihave received your letter of May 31, Mother dearest.Merci. With regard to the statistical returns—from Tver
and Vyatka—I think I have already written thatthere is no
need to send them all to me; I am not working on this now
and do not intend to until my term of exile is finished.
If any particular book is needed it will be better for me
to order it separately, otherwise I shall have a mountain
of books to bring back. But you are probably sending only
a few statistical returns. Mikhail Alexandrovich writes that
he does not expect his fiancée until the end of summer.

Wedo not think it worth while asking for a transfer to
Krasnoyarsk. We have been talking recently with
Yelizaveta Vasilyevna, who is thinking of asking for permission
for me to go with them to Ufa this autumn because of the
difficulty of a winter journey for her and Nadya. If she
carries out her intention I will let you know.

Wehave been paid our allowances.

Wehave news from Yermakovskoye that Anatoly is no
better.

Wehave also heard that Lyakhovsky has made a trip to
Chita as a doctor.

Itis a pity you are having such bad weather and have
no opportunity for a good rest in the country. June has
been rainy here, too.

Lifehere goes on as usual. I am not working much at
present and soon, when the shooting season opens, I shall
probably work even less.

Ihave received the May issue ofNachalo—pretty badly
cut up. I do not think there is anything of particular
interest in it. I am losing all hope of that journal regaining
its health. I have had a letter telling me that the Ministry
of the Interior has demanded that the editors reveal the
names of the authors who wrote in the first and in the April
issues under pseudonyms. It would be interesting to know
whether we have any mutual acquaintances among the
“revealed”.

Manykisses for you and regards to all.

Yours,V. U.

Ihave seenNauchnoye ObozreniyeNo. 5 and find that
Tugan-Baranovsky’s article in it is monstrously foolish and
nonsensical; he has simply arbitrarily introduced changes
into the rate of surplus value in order to “refute” Marx;
he assumes an absurdity—a change in the productivity of
labour without a change in the value of the product. I
don’t know whether every such nonsensical article is worth
writing about. Let him first fulfil his promise to develop
it in
detail.[2]In general I am becoming a more and more
determined opponent of the latest “critical stream” in
Marxism and of neo-Kantianism (which has produced,
incidentally, the idea of separating sociological from economic
laws). The author ofBeiträge zur Geschichte des

Materialismus[1]is quite right in declaring that neo-Kantianism is a
reactionary theory of the reactionary bourgeoisie and in rebelling
against Bernstein. I am extremely interested in Bogdanov’s
new book (Osnovniye elementy istoricheskogo vozzreniya na,
prirodu, St. Petersburg, 1899) and have ordered it; the
review of it in the May issue ofNachalowas written
ridiculously, with pompous phrases but no mention of the real
problem. I am very sorry that I somehow missed the
advertisement of the book when it was published. I think it
should be a sensible book and that such a review should not
be left
unanswered.[3]

Amvery pleased with the gun. We did not shoot much
in spring. Soon the real season will begin and I intend to
spend more time shooting this summer.

Allthe best,V. U.

Pleasesend me alistof the Zemstvo statistical returns
that have been sent to me—titles and brief contents, i.e.,
tables or tables+text, nothing else.

[1]Essayson the History of Materialismby G. V. Plekhanov.—Ed.

[2]Leninmentioned Tugan-Baranovsky’s article in a footnote to the
last paragraph of his  article   “Uncritical Criticism”   (Collected
Works, Vol. 3, p. 632) and in a letter to A. N.   Potresov dated
June 27, 1899 (Collected Works, Vol. 34, p. 39).

[3]Thereview was that by G-d of A. Bogdanov’s bookOsnovniye
elementy istoricheskogo vzglyada na prirodu. It is not; known whether
Lenin wrote anything in reply to the review. From his letter
to Maxim Gorky, dated February 25, 1908 (Collected Works, Vol.
13, p. 448) we know that he had the book in Siberia.

Itis known from a letter to A. N. Potresov, dated June 27,1899,
that Lenin at that time assumed that A. Bogdanov was the
pseudonym of G. V. Plekhanov (seeCollected Works, Vol. 34, p. 41).